4:48 p.m.
I have a 128 MB USB Lexar Jump Drive. It worked reliably for me for
close to a year. About a month ago it became painfully slow when
writing large files to it (both Fedora and Windows) - It takes about 24
minutes to write a 4.5 MB file to it. Read speed from the device
appears to be as fast as always.
I contacted Lexar and they suggested that I reformat the device with
FAT32 format. After reformatting to FAT32 read/write speed when using
Windows appears to be back to normal. However when automounted on my
FC3 desktop the write speed is still 24 minutes to write the same 4.5 MB
file. Fast on Windows slow on Fedora - any one have any suggestions?
Of course Lexar is no help when it comes to Linux.
5:07 p.m.
Charlie McVeigh wrote:
FC3 desktop the write speed is still 24 minutes to write the same 4.5
MB
file. Fast on Windows slow on Fedora - any one have any suggestions?
Of course Lexar is no help when it comes to Linux.
What are the mount options? sync? That could be evil apparently.
-Andy
5:33 p.m.
>>>> "CM" == Charlie McVeigh
<cmcveigh(a)adelphia.net> writes:
CM> However when automounted on my FC3 desktop the write speed is
CM> still 24 minutes to write the same 4.5 MB file. Fast on Windows
CM> slow on Fedora - any one have any suggestions?
It will be slow if mounted with the "sync" option. Under FC3 this is
the default; I hacked HAL to drop the "sync". My hacked HAL packages
are at http://www.math.uh.edu/~tibbs/rpms/hal-nosync/
These packages also include the fix for the floppy mounting problem.
- J<
9:19 p.m.
On Thu, 2005-11-10 at 17:33 -0600, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
>>>>> "CM" == Charlie McVeigh
<cmcveigh(a)adelphia.net> writes:
CM> However when automounted on my FC3 desktop the write speed is
CM> still 24 minutes to write the same 4.5 MB file. Fast on Windows
CM> slow on Fedora - any one have any suggestions?
It will be slow if mounted with the "sync" option. Under FC3 this is
the default; I hacked HAL to drop the "sync". My hacked HAL packages
are at http://www.math.uh.edu/~tibbs/rpms/hal-nosync/
These packages also include the fix for the floppy mounting problem.
- J<
Thanks for the responses so far. The Jump Drive is being mounted with
the sync option.
Is it possible to change a configuration file to get the desired mount
without the sync option? If I need to install the RPM's from the link
above do I install them all?
Thanks.
10:36 p.m.
New subject: To upgrade, or not to upgrade? Fc3 to FC4
Well, I have been using fc3 since its final debut, and I love it. But, now
that IBM has released the Cell SDK for FC4... I have to consider it.
I know I can use yum to update, but, how does that compare to a fresh
install? I know with windows, doing an upgrade is, well... pretty crappy.
But, i am unfamiliar with how linux works to this respect.
And... I had problems with gcc 4... is this something I can fix in the code?
I had problems compiling things on fc4 when they worked fine on fc3 the
last time I tried it on a seperate partition.
Thanks,
Martin
3:55 a.m.
New subject: To upgrade, or not to upgrade? Fc3 to FC4
Hi Kahn:
It seems like most of the things that made me
regret updating this Notebook PC to FC4 have been
fixed. I am still holding out on a desktop, but I
would upgrade it if something came through that I felt
I needed that wouldn't run on FC3.
FYI the menu system under Gnome on FC4 is very
slow, whereas the KDE one is working fine. I suggest
using KDE.
I do not do allot of development work, but the
few things that I have compiled under FC4 are working
fine.
Best Regards,
L. Paul Andralouis
--- Kahn Seidl <mkseidl(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
Well, I have been using fc3 since its final debut,
and I love it. But, now
that IBM has released the Cell SDK for FC4... I have
to consider it.
I know I can use yum to update, but, how does that
compare to a fresh
install? I know with windows, doing an upgrade is,
well... pretty crappy.
But, i am unfamiliar with how linux works to this
respect.
And... I had problems with gcc 4... is this
something I can fix in the code?
I had problems compiling things on fc4 when they
worked fine on fc3 the
last time I tried it on a seperate partition.
Thanks,
Martin
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list(a)redhat.com
To unsubscribe:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
http://mail.yahoo.com
5 p.m.
New subject: To upgrade, or not to upgrade? Fc3 to FC4
-----Original Message-----
From: fedora-list-bounces(a)redhat.com [mailto:fedora-list-bounces@redhat.com]
On Behalf Of Kahn Seidl
Sent: Friday, 11 November, 2005 05:37
To: fedora-list(a)redhat.com
Subject: To upgrade, or not to upgrade? Fc3 to FC4
Well, I have been using fc3 since its final debut, and I love it. But, now
that IBM has released the Cell SDK for FC4... I have to consider it.
I know I can use yum to update, but, how does that compare to a fresh
install? I know with windows, doing an upgrade is, well... pretty crappy.
But, i am unfamiliar with how linux works to this respect.
And... I had problems with gcc 4... is this something I can fix in the code?
I had problems compiling things on fc4 when they worked fine on fc3 the
last time I tried it on a seperate partition.
Thanks,
Martin
I've been using fedora since the first release and always wondered about:
would I upgrade or do a fresh install.
From FC1 to FC2 I upgraded and it unfortunately failed by a reason I
still
do not know, so I did a fresh install.
From FC2 to FC3 to FC4 I used and upgrade, always with a backup made
before
the upgrade to recover from a failed upgrade. Fortunately I never had to use
the backup. I did need to repair some config files after the upgrade, but
that was easy to do compared with fully configure a new server to your
needs.
Upgrade with a fresh backup is my recommendation. ( I never used yum to
upgrade, just the cd's )
Cheers,
Edwin
5:34 p.m.
New subject: To upgrade, or not to upgrade? Fc3 to FC4
I have upgraded from fc3 to fc4 without any difficulties. First I installed
fedora-release-4-2 rpm so that /etc/yum.repos.d was updated with the fc4 repo
locations. Then I just run # yum upgrade and that was it. You can root the
installer from fc4 CD and choose upgrade system. I don't think you need a
"clean" installation of fc3 - that would no make sense.
However I have experienced problems caused by implement of python 2.4, so
check that none of your programs need python 2.3.
To avoid problems with GCC4 you would probably want to install the
compat-gcc-32-* packages, which provide the backward compatibility.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Edwin Dicker" <fedora(a)dicker.nl>
To: "'For users of Fedora Core releases'"
<fedora-list(a)redhat.com>
Subject: RE: To upgrade, or not to upgrade? Fc3 to FC4
Date: Saturday 03 December 2005 04:00
-----Original Message-----
From: fedora-list-bounces(a)redhat.com [mailto:fedora-list-bounces@redhat.com]
On Behalf Of Kahn Seidl
Sent: Friday, 11 November, 2005 05:37
To: fedora-list(a)redhat.com
Subject: To upgrade, or not to upgrade? Fc3 to FC4
Well, I have been using fc3 since its final debut, and I love it. But, now
that IBM has released the Cell SDK for FC4... I have to consider it.
I know I can use yum to update, but, how does that compare to a fresh
install? I know with windows, doing an upgrade is, well... pretty crappy.
But, i am unfamiliar with how linux works to this respect.
And... I had problems with gcc 4... is this something I can fix in the code?
I had problems compiling things on fc4 when they worked fine on fc3 the
last time I tried it on a seperate partition.
Thanks,
Martin
I've been using fedora since the first release and always wondered about:
would I upgrade or do a fresh install.
>From FC1 to FC2 I upgraded and it unfortunately failed by a reason I still
do not know, so I did a fresh install.
>From FC2 to FC3 to FC4 I used and upgrade, always with a backup made before
the upgrade to recover from a failed upgrade. Fortunately I never had to use
the backup. I did need to repair some config files after the upgrade, but
that was easy to do compared with fully configure a new server to your
needs.
Upgrade with a fresh backup is my recommendation. ( I never used yum to
upgrade, just the cd's )
Cheers,
Edwin
11:01 p.m.
>>>> "CM" == Charlie McVeigh
<cmcveigh(a)adelphia.net> writes:
CM> Is it possible to change a configuration file to get the desired
CM> mount without the sync option?
It's /usr/share/hal/fdi/90defaultpolicy/storage-policy.fdi; Look for
the two occurrences of:
<merge key="volume.policy.mount_option.sync"
type="bool">true</merge>
and change the "true" to "false". Or grab my RPMs, put them in an
empty directory and run "rpm -Fvh *i386.rpm".
- J<
8:30 a.m.
New subject: Slow Writing to Lexar Jump Drive (SOLVED)
On Thu, 2005-11-10 at 23:01 -0600, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
>>>>> "CM" == Charlie McVeigh
<cmcveigh(a)adelphia.net> writes:
CM> Is it possible to change a configuration file to get the desired
CM> mount without the sync option?
It's /usr/share/hal/fdi/90defaultpolicy/storage-policy.fdi; Look for
the two occurrences of:
<merge key="volume.policy.mount_option.sync"
type="bool">true</merge>
and change the "true" to "false". Or grab my RPMs, put them in an
empty directory and run "rpm -Fvh *i386.rpm".
- J<
Making the changes to the storage-policy.fdi file did the trick.
Thanks to all who posted. The quality and speed of support from this
board never ceases to amaze me.
Charlie
8:39 a.m.
New subject: Slow Writing to Lexar Jump Drive (SOLVED)
On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 09:30:30 -0500 Charlie McVeigh wrote:
On Thu, 2005-11-10 at 23:01 -0600, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> >>>>> "CM" == Charlie McVeigh <cmcveigh(a)adelphia.net>
writes:
>
> CM> Is it possible to change a configuration file to get the desired
> CM> mount without the sync option?
>
> It's /usr/share/hal/fdi/90defaultpolicy/storage-policy.fdi; Look for
> the two occurrences of:
>
> <merge key="volume.policy.mount_option.sync"
type="bool">true</merge>
>
> and change the "true" to "false". Or grab my RPMs, put them in
an
> empty directory and run "rpm -Fvh *i386.rpm".
>
> - J<
>
>
Making the changes to the storage-policy.fdi file did the trick.
Ok, it works for you.
But "man fstab-sync" says:
| By default, the /usr/share/hal/fdi/90defaultpolicy/storage-policy.fdi
| file specifies the policy - this file should never be edited by the
| system administrator as it might get updated by the OS vendor for
| security updates. Instead, system- or site-specific rules can be put
| in the /usr/share/hal/fdi/95userpolicy directory.
--Frank Elsner
10:04 a.m.
New subject: Slow Writing to Lexar Jump Drive (SOLVED)
On Fri, 2005-11-11 at 15:39 +0100, Frank Elsner wrote:
On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 09:30:30 -0500 Charlie McVeigh wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-11-10 at 23:01 -0600, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> > >>>>> "CM" == Charlie McVeigh
<cmcveigh(a)adelphia.net> writes:
> >
> > CM> Is it possible to change a configuration file to get the desired
> > CM> mount without the sync option?
> >
> > It's /usr/share/hal/fdi/90defaultpolicy/storage-policy.fdi; Look for
> > the two occurrences of:
> >
> > <merge key="volume.policy.mount_option.sync"
type="bool">true</merge>
> >
> > and change the "true" to "false". Or grab my RPMs, put
them in an
> > empty directory and run "rpm -Fvh *i386.rpm".
> >
> > - J<
> >
> >
> Making the changes to the storage-policy.fdi file did the trick.
Ok, it works for you.
But "man fstab-sync" says:
| By default, the /usr/share/hal/fdi/90defaultpolicy/storage-policy.fdi
| file specifies the policy - this file should never be edited by the
| system administrator as it might get updated by the OS vendor for
| security updates. Instead, system- or site-specific rules can be put
| in the /usr/share/hal/fdi/95userpolicy directory.
--Frank Elsner
I stand corrected. Putting storage-policy.fdi in the 95userpolicy
directory works as advertised.
Charlie
5:52 p.m.
On Thu, 2005-11-10 at 17:48 -0500, Charlie McVeigh wrote:
I have a 128 MB USB Lexar Jump Drive. It worked reliably for me for
close to a year. About a month ago it became painfully slow when
writing large files to it (both Fedora and Windows) - It takes about 24
minutes to write a 4.5 MB file to it. Read speed from the device
appears to be as fast as always.
I contacted Lexar and they suggested that I reformat the device with
FAT32 format. After reformatting to FAT32 read/write speed when using
Windows appears to be back to normal. However when automounted on my
FC3 desktop the write speed is still 24 minutes to write the same 4.5 MB
file. Fast on Windows slow on Fedora - any one have any suggestions?
Of course Lexar is no help when it comes to Linux.
With the drive mounted type "mount" with no parameters and check the
mount options for the drive. If it says "sync" in the list of options,
that's the source of your problem. There are other threads over the
past several months regarding this and the sync option has been removed
from the relevant hal configuration files. You should update and/or
correct that situation to eliminate the sync option.
Mike
--
Michael H. Warfield | (770) 985-6132 | mhw(a)WittsEnd.com
/\/\|=mhw=|\/\/ | (678) 463-0932 | http://www.wittsend.com/mhw/
NIC whois: MHW9 | An optimist believes we live in the best of all
PGP Key: 0xDF1DD471 | possible worlds. A pessimist is sure of it!
6719
days inactive
6741
days old
12 comments
9 participants
participants (9)
-
Andy Green -
Charlie McVeigh -
Edwin Dicker -
Frank Elsner -
Jason L Tibbitts III -
Kahn Seidl -
L. Paul Andralouis -
Michael H. Warfield -
Sergey